Cited by 58Frailty in Older AdultsEpigenetics and DNA MethylationGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms

Epigenetic age is associated with baseline and 3-year change in frailty in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging

Open access
Verschoor, Chris P., Lin, David T. S., Kobor, Michael S., Mian, Oxana, Ma, Jinhui, Pare, Guillaume, Ybazeta, Gustavo·2021·Clinical Epigenetics

Abstract

Background: The trajectory of frailty in older adults is important to public health; therefore, markers that may help predict this and other important outcomes could be beneficial. Epigenetic clocks have been developed and are associated with various health-related outcomes and sociodemographic factors, but associations with frailty are poorly described. Further, it is uncertain whether newer generations of epigenetic clocks, trained on variables other than chronological age, would be more strongly associated with frailty than earlier developed clocks. Using data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA), we tested the hypothesis that clocks trained on phenotypic markers of health or mortality (i.e., Dunedin PoAm, GrimAge, PhenoAge and Zhang in Nat Commun 8:14617, 2017) would best predict changes in a 76-item frailty index (FI) over a 3-year interval, as compared to clocks trained on chronological age (i.e., Hannum in Mol Cell 49:359–367, 2013, Horvath in Genome Biol 14:R115, 2013, Lin in Aging 8:394–401, 2016, and Yang Genome Biol 17:205, 2016). Results: We show that in 1446 participants, phenotype/mortality-trained clocks outperformed age-trained clocks with regard to the association with baseline frailty (mean = 0.141, SD = 0.075), the greatest of which is GrimAge, where a 1-SD increase in ΔGrimAge (i.e., the difference from chronological age) was associated with a 0.020 increase in frailty (95% CI 0.016, 0.024), or ~ 27% relative to the SD in frailty. Only GrimAge and Hannum (Mol Cell 49:359–367, 2013) were significantly associated with change in frailty over time, where a 1-SD increase in ΔGrimAge and ΔHannum 2013 was associated with a 0.0030 (95% CI 0.0007, 0.0050) and 0.0028 (95% CI 0.0007, 0.0050) increase over 3 years, respectively, or ~ 7% relative to the SD in frailty change. Conclusion: Both prevalence and change in frailty are associated with increased epigenetic age. However, not all clocks are equally sensitive to these outcomes and depend on their underlying relationship with chronological age, healthspan and lifespan. Certain clocks were significantly associated with relatively short-term changes in frailty, thereby supporting their utility in initiatives and interventions to promote healthy aging.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13148-021-01150-1

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The DNAm GrimAge clock shows consistently stronger associations with various measures of age-related dysfunction, including heart disease, frailty, and cognitive and physical decline, compared to other clocks.

    “The DNAm GrimAge clock shows consistently stronger associations with various measures of age-related dysfunction, including heart disease, frailty, and cognitive and physical decline, compared to other clocks47,48,50,64–72.”

    From Measuring biological age using omics data (2022) · cites this paper as [64]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Verschoor, C. P., Lin, D. T. S., Kobor, M. S., Mian, O., Ma, J., Pare, G., & Ybazeta, G.
Affiliations
  • Health Sciences North (CA)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • McMaster University (CA)
Corresponding author
Verschoor, Chris P.
Venue
Clinical Epigenetics
Published
2021-08-23
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
163-163
ISSN
  • 1868-7075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1868-7083
OpenAlex
W3193863613
Cited by
58
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 12
FWCI
4.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Epigenetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • cIRcle (University of British Columbia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Institute of Aging (ACD-170293)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Aging › Genetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Keywords
epigenetic clocks, biological age, frailty, frailty index, GrimAge, Hannum clock, Horvath clock, PhenoAge, chronological age, older adults, Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
MeSH terms
Frailty, Sociodemographic Factors, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Canada, Cause of Death, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Time Factors, Genetic Variation, DNA Methylation, Epigenesis, Genetic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review